The Ethics of Consequences

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Williams: Some of the weaker attacks at being non-consequentialists are often sort of like this, some sort of strawman view that you don't care at all what the consequences would be. And he tells the story about how that makes sense that consequences would creep their way into ethical theory in a very natural way. The minute you realize that these are not God-given rules to never be broken, right? The minute you accept that, you have accepted a world in which you can make modifications to those rules or make exceptions. Those exceptions will be motivated by a knowledge of what the consequences are.

David and Tamler take a break from complaining about psychological studies that measure utilitarianism to complain about the moral theory itself. We talk about one of the most famous critiques of utilitarian theories from Bernard Williams. Does utilitarianism annihilate our integrity--our unity--as people? Would trying to maximize well-being fracture our identities, and swallow up our projects, motivations, and moral convictions--the same convictions that make utilitarianism seem appealing in the first place? Is it ultimately self-defeating as a moral theory?

Plus, we talk about the adventures of Tamler's based step-mom Christina Hoff Sommers' at Lewis and Clark law school. Will David stay woke?

Support Very Bad Wizards

Links: